Tag Archives: Latvia

2016 is heading for closure and it’s time to set the record what happened this year and what to expect of next 12 months. Many has called 2016 as one of the worst years in the decades. It was time of rather unexpected events, sad events and tragic events. While Latvia overall had mostly peaceful year it all can change basing on all the events that happened abroad. The country is planning to spend 60 million euros on 100th anniversary on independence on 2018. Two years are still in wait for that. But, these two years are could be the most crucial for our country and might as well determine will Latvia be able to mark its 100 years of independence at all. For there is a danger that in 2-3 years Latvia might lose its independence and sovereignty. In this review it will be explained why this can happen and what could we do to prevent it.

The weakening of the West and its impact on Latvia

Two most crucial events that will go down in history of 2016 will be the Brexit and US Presidential election. Both events weakened UK, EU and US on political and economic scale. It revealed a wide fraction of society in US and EU that is not satisfied with politics of the liberal and leftist elites that had ruled for last 20 years and has given their votes for populism, far right clinging politics and authoritarian style of politics. Their dissatisfaction with current so called establishment is both rational and irrational and is based on their personal experiences and misfortunes. Despite the obvious Russian meddling and support for these movements it’s clear that they have strong support base and these movements have managed to strike on both of UK and US and that is bad news for our country. Firstly as UK has yet to make the crucial step to leave EU there is plenty of speculation of how it will affect the thousands of Latvian guest workers in UK, how it will affect the EU market and what impact it will leave on our economy. So far UK has kept its solid position in NATO, the new foreign minister Boris Johnson is widely critical on Russian criminal foreign policy (regarding his past warm connections with Russia), but we will see how this will change after new elections 2020 that is however a long wait from now. In US the situation has become unpredictable every day. The country has been affected by Russian secret service orchestrated hacking that helped Donald J. Trump to win, who has high expectations of friendship with Russian leader Vladimir Putin and who has shown disregard to NATO and the defense of Europe. Donald Trump runs his politics as reality show, every day feeding twitter with his outlandish tweets and load announcements and claims. He has made US unpredictable just as Russia has been for years. From words to actions he has appointed an oil cooperation CEO Rex Tillerson as State Secretary who of no doubt is in unfavor of Russian containment policy that means sanctions against his business partners and low oil prices. Judging by the logic of business not politics his and Trumps decision in 2017 would be full or partial removal of sanctions against Russia.

For Latvia this means a dangerous return to diplomatic situation of 1938-1940. Back then Latvia had no real allies. UK and France was distant and skeptical about their support for Baltic States against Nazi Germany and Soviet Union. In the end the fate of Latvia was determined by Nazi Germany and Soviet Union, both of whom Latvia had signed non-aggression pacts. Left without support from outside it was forced to choose between bloody war of survival or shameful silent submission. It choose the second option and we still bear the bitter fruits of that. Russia is aiming to repeat this once again. We really cannot predict Trump’s politics – will he remove sanctions, minimize US involvement in NATO and drop pledge to defend every each of them? Or the Trumps expectations of Putin and Putin of Trump would end in mutual disappointment and confrontation would again increase? Then there is more hardly calculable factors in Europe that threaten to create this situation – first its elections in France that would bring right-wing leader Marine le Pen or François Fillon to power. Both has shown their open sympathy to Russia and suggesting the ease of relations on expense of Ukraine and Baltic States. Then there is Germany – Angela Merkel has been in power for 11 years and her leadership is fading in light of integration failure, refugee failure and recent terrorist act. In 2017 she faces Federal Elections. Again her competitors is making criticism on relations with Russia. If both of these countries drop the Russian containment policy the diplomatic and security position of Latvia would severely weaken.

Let’s be clear however, while Germany and France can be still called reliable allies for the Baltic States they are certainly no friends for Ukraine. The so-called Minsk ceasefire that has not been in effect since its implementation, brokered both by Holland and Merkel has made Eastern Ukraine into active frozen conflict where lives are lost almost daily on both sides without much achievements or changes. “No change on the Eastern Ukrainian Front” one would say. The constant bleed out of Ukraine only serves the Russia. US and EU is giving Ukraine both carrot and stick. A carrot of some humanitarian or non-lethal military support on basis of not breaking ceasefire and stick of continuing criticism and pushover for lack of reforms in the country that is not entirely unjustified. But such situation cannot last forever, Ukraine has to strike back and regain villages and cities used as bases for constant attacks on Ukrainian positions. And who to judge Ukraine for doing so – it’s their land, that has been captured by foreign country disguised as separatists. The ones who will judge will be wealthy European countries who does not have an open border with Russia – yet.

So both for Ukraine and the Baltic States a situation can be possible in next two years when they have no allies. One ally could still be Poland. While it’s rigged with inner political struggle between nationalistic government and liberal opposition, its shows a stiff opposition to Russia and calls for militarization and tough response. If Finland or Sweden would join the NATO, with their proximity to Russia they may show reliance to Baltic States. But, if UK, Germany and France would drop out of collective security policy and most important the US than Latvia as well as Poland is in danger. The very aim of Russia is to defeat the NATO adversary without a fight. A direct conflict could end in bitter destructive defeat. So the proper aim for Russia is the break up the collective security, contribute to the election of Russia friendly candidates that may allow another Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. A pact that would give Russia a free hand on Ukraine and Baltic States. Our political and military leaders have vowed to not repeat the mistake of 1939-1940 and resist, but will this wove would be kept knowing of low or confused support from other countries. In the end Europe again could divert to situation of 5th-19th century when it was a collection of warring rivaling countries and brief alliances. In such situation for a country with less than 1 million people and weak economy and army has no place for existence. Latvia can only exist with strong united friendly Europe and strong supportive US. And weak Russia. It’s doubtful Russia and Latvia would ever achieve mutual friendship. So if Latvia cannot attain a concrete support from its western partners it’s doomed to lose at least its sovereignty to Russia. This will be the challenge for this country for next two years.

Latvian inner political and economic weakening

Last year when talking about year 2015 I predicted the rise of nationalistic-isolationist populist government forming in Latvia itself. In result a government lead by Māris Kučinskis from Green Party and Latvian Farmers Party alliance was formed in early 2016. Māris Kučinskis with his lack of English skills keeps low profile in foreign gatherings, but his profile as Prime Minister is also very low profile. While he can be praised for being calm of steel nerves he also quite lethargic and has lead his government into flow of scandals and mishaps without affecting much of himself. The main points of conflicts in Latvian interior policy was grand issues with State Revenue Service and raise of taxes for small enterprises. In the spotlight of this is Daina Reizniece-Ozola a Finance minister a chess champion and a flashy talker. All year we saw her battling the corruption in State Revenue Service and taking sharp criticism for poorly managed raise for taxing the small enterprises. The latter issue brought to a bitter conflict with coalition partner liberal Unity (Vienotība) and even brought to a danger of collapse of government. So far the danger was averted and how long this inept government continues to exist remains to be seen.

On political ratings scale (as much of these ratings reflects the real political opinion is always a question) it has been successful for pro-Kremlin Harmony party (Saskaņa) Green Farmers and National Alliance and misfortune for liberal Unity. Unity lost its leading position gained since 2008, after poorly managed inner party coup that lead to collapse of Laimdota Straujuma government. Unity ratings went downhill and its long standing leader Solvita Āboltiņa had to resign from party leadership. Ex EU commissar Andris Piebalgs the new party leader tries to restore the parties fading image and power. Right now Unity’s poll rating is above 5% that would make a miserable fraction in newly elected parliament. Harmony party rating is 17%, Green Party about the same and National Alliance 7%. Plus the eccentric MP’s Artuss Kaimiņš party KPV and two elected small parties Latvian Regional Alliance and To Latvia from Heart is lagging behind 5% looking to take Unities votes.

If this continues there is a great chance of future Latvian government without a liberal party. Either its share of power would be minimal or it won’t be represented at all. There is a small chance that another liberal party called “For Prosperity of Latvia” (Latvijas Attīstībai) might take Unities place but that depends how its leader Juris Pūce would fair in Riga municipal election against incumbent Harmony party mayor Nils Ušakovs. Ušakovs who leads the capital city with scandals, failed street restoration projects and future projects facing major protests, who still has large support base mainly from Russian speakers, however his image is tainted by his offensive remarks towards Latvians and open support for Kremlin policy. But, knowing the population base in Riga he still has high chance to get clear third term as mayor of Riga. Harmony party meanwhile in parliament functions as opposition party and supports the coalition when it’s bargained. Green Farmers and National Alliance as for now would not consider them in government at least for now.

In security policy Latvia seems to be doing well. The President Raimonds Vējonis an ex-minister of Defense is good negotiator with NATO so as the current Defense Minister Raimonds Bergmanis. An important step this year was the NATO’s decision to store permanent NATO’s international battalion in Baltic States and Poland. Lucky for Latvia the head of forces stored in Latvia will be Canada that has always been loyal to the principles of NATO and has taken part in many operations across the world. Of course the governments and policies can always change. Some people may say that these merely thousand troops would provoke and threaten Russia. First of all Russia has some 30 thousand troops stored in Kaliningrad region alone and these forces will be combined into 30th army next year. Russia has stored nuclear capable missiles in this region, plus the Russian forces who are constantly drilled for attack situations in Pskov and Leningrad region are in thousands. While this international battalion and all three Latvian armies would create a great losses for Russians in case of invasion in the Baltic Sates; they are useless for attacking Russia, so who these forces actually provoke Russia is what people saying these things cannot provide no explanation. While this small NATO force is no match for greater Russian armies, it serves as buffer; should one of its soldiers die from Russian hands it would provoke a conflict. However, every soldier and general serves the politician – as we talked here before – its Russian goal to defeat the West on political level before defeating it on military level. Weak politicians mean weak military in the Western world. So this rather small NATO force in Latvia by its means serves as no guarantee to our security and independence.

Latvian economy has been stagnating for last few years. While Latvia did made a tremendous recovery from 2008-2009 crisis by painful austerity policies, the continuation of these policies are rather stagnating economy that might start to enter decay next year. The overall economic and political climate is passively negative and opens door for populist political manipulations. For this reason a future without liberal party is possible. Latvia could be either ruled by alliance of populist right-wing conservatives and nationalists or it can be ruled by pro-kremlin forces. The next year’s municipal elections will show how strong are ruling parties and how strong is pro-Kremlin Harmony. Harmony could take over more cities in Eastern Latvia and the second biggest city Daugavpils that despite its Russian speaking minority has never had a Harmony mayor. For fading liberal Unity the only chance is to use the weaknesses of their conservative foes in the government and act as inner opposition that is doing now slightly successfully and try to achieve great results in Riga and other cities. Rather dangerous move is to bring down the government that again could lead to unforeseen consequences.

The challenge of 2017-2018

Some say history goes in circles and one wave replaces another. A wave of liberalism, multiculturalism in Europe and US seems to have dwindled and new wave of nationalism, isolationism and populism has taken its strength. To those who support this wave following lines are not of concern and they can stop reading this article. For those who fear this wave hear the following words. Stand your ground to this wave and don’t let it bring you down. Question, protest and resist policies made against collective security and seeking common ground with Russia. To seek a common ground with Russia as it has emerged today would be same as making common ground with Nazi Germany. It will be another Munich agreement in far worse consequences. Convince people to go to elections. Many of the populist voters are hard to convince as they vote by their emotions rather than reason. As more people avoid elections the higher chance for populists to gain upper hand. The US elections showed how crucial was the number of absent voters. Also support your army every way possible. When surrounded by militant forces calls for pacifism and unreasonable criticism of the home military brings no fruits. There are no civilians in the war for these forces. Question everything that comes from Russian or pro-Russian news outlets, as deception that turns into truth is their main instrument. Question everything that is in the social nets and even from your trustful state TV or relatives or friends. The amount of propaganda and disinformation these days would make Dr. Goebbels role in his grave. Do not give in to threats by terrorists and enemy armies by submitting to their demands or just give empty #standwithyou styled condolences. The time for that has passed. Empty words and hashtags have no power. Resilience and relentless to all the threats and dangers are the one that enemy fears off. Weakness it what it seeks and we cannot give him that weakness.

The future for Latvia and neighboring countries has become more unclear and shady more than ever. Either Latvia would continue as independent prosperous country that gives others a reason to respect it and stand for it or it will become a pariah state that would be seen as expendable to other countries in the world. The war is what we fear the most. Riga could also turn into Aleppo if enabled so. In the end the war would determine if this nation has deserved and secured its position as independent country or it will go down in the annals of history as another lost kingdom succumbed by outside forces. If we will reach November 18 2018 with this warning as not fulfilled then the words said in this in this article would had reached their purpose.

Ukrainian People’s Republic (Українська Народна Республіка УНР or UNR) was first modern Ukrainian national statehood that existed between 1917 and 1921. Similarly to Belarusian People’s Republic (BNR) it did not survive the tides of war, however contrary to BNR, UNR received greater support and recognition from Latvia. Latvian officers also took part in UNR national forces and both sides had high hopes towards each other. On 1920 as Ukraine was divided between Soviet Russia and Poland in pursue for peace with Soviets, Latvia had to abandon its support for UNR. Article highlights Latvian – Ukrainian diplomatic relations and Latvian participation in UNR armed forces.

On March 17 1917 after the collapse of Russian Empire Central Council of Ukraine (Українська Центральна Рада UCR) was established in Kyiv. One of its main demands was national autonomy that was not supported by Russian Provisional Government in Petrograd. In response Ukrainian national forces under the command of General Pavlo Skoropadskyi started to assemble to defend Ukrainian sovereignty. On October 25 (November 7) Bolsheviks seized power in Petrograd and their supporters took over some areas in Ukraine. UCR managed to control much of Ukraine and on November 7 (November 20) the Ukrainian People’s Republic was proclaimed. Meanwhile in Kharkiv on December 11-12 1917 Ukrainian Soviet Republic was founded. Bolsheviks advanced and gained control over much of Ukraine and on February 8 captured Kyiv. Chief Otaman Symon Petliura who commanded UCR armed forces faced gruesome defeat at the battle of Kruty where Ukrainian 1st Student company and Cadet Corps suffered great casualties. On January 9 (22) UNR again proclaimed full independence and severed all ties with Russia. On February 9 in Brestlitovsk UNR signed peace treaty with Germany and Austria-Hungary gaining their military support in return for food provisions. German forces entered Ukraine and on March 1 captured Kyiv. On March 3 Soviet Russia ceded Ukraine to Germany in peace agreement in Brestlitovsk. UNR forces of 15 000 men entered Kyiv and Crimea. UNR was recognized by Germany, Bulgaria, Austria-Hungary, Turkey and Great Britain.

Ukraine was taken over by Germans and Austrians who came in early conflict with UCR who protested against German military courts. German authorities formally dissolved UCR. In response UCR proclaimed new leftist leaning UNR constitution. Ukrainian right-wing rushed to prevent Ukrainian-German confrontation and rise of left-wing on April 29 seized power. General Pavlo Skoropadskyi became dictator under the title of Hetman of Ukraine. UNR faced resistance from Bolsheviks and peasants lead by anarchist Nestor Makhno. More countries however recognized UNR such as Finland, Poland, Romania, Switzerland, Denmark, Netherlands, Norway and Persia. As of November 11 1918 when Germany and Austria-Hungary collapsed situation changed in Ukraine. UNR elites supporting Allied powers created Directory lead by Symon Petliura, who in December 14 deposed hetman Skoropadskyi and proclaimed second Ukrainian People’s Republic (during hetman’s dictatorship UNR was called “Ukrainian State”). Meanwhile in Western Part of Ukraine a Western Ukrainian People’s Republic on October 19 1918 was proclaimed in attempts to split from Austria- Hungary who controlled Lviv (Lemberg). On January 1919 it united with UNR. The Western Ukraine with Lviv in center was claimed by Poland and both sides engaged each other in battles until June 1919.

Soviet Russia immediately after German surrender to Allies canceled Brestlitovsk peace agreement and UNR had to declare war on them on January 16 1919. On February 5 Bolsheviks again captured Kyiv and reached Zbruch River west of Ukraine and entered Crimea. Ukrainian peasants and anarchist groups resisted Bolsheviks while un summer of 1919 the monarchist White Guard South Russian Volunteer army lead by general Anton Denikin attacked Bolsheviks and captured Kharkiv on the way to Moscow and on August 31 entered Kyiv. As his forces were defeated and chased away Bolsheviks again took over much of Ukraine in March 1920.

Situation demanded an alliance with Poland that was reached by Symon Petliura. On April 26 1920 Polish-Ukrainian forces attacked Bolsheviks on May 7 captured Kyiv. Polish forces reached river Dnipro. Bolsheviks ignited counter offensive and On June 12 Poles abandoned Kyiv, on July 4 Bolsheviks started attack in Belarus and reached Warsaw. On August 12-17 the Bolshevik offensive was finally stopped at the gates of Warsaw. On March 18 1920 in Riga Poland and Soviet Russia signed peace agreement dividing Ukraine in two. Central, South and East Ukraine was granted to Soviets while Western Part of Ukraine including Lviv (Lwov in Polish) was ceded to Poland. Recognized also by Ukrainian delegation the Riga peace agreement was death sentence to UNR. Symon Petliura dismissed Directory and withdraw his forces to Poland where he was interned. Rumania and Czechoslovakia also gained Ukrainian ethnic lands. Symon Petliura lead the UNR in exile until he was assassinated by Soviet agent on 1926. UNR continued to work in exile in Poland until 1939 and the moved to France where it ceased to exist after Nazi occupation. After the war in western exile Ukrainian National Council (Українська Національна Рада) that existed until 1991 when it recognized new Republic of Ukraine that formed in result of collapse of the Soviet Union.

During dramatic and fast changing events in Ukraine during Soviet-Ukrainian war many Latvians were involved army in state matters. Firs before the First World War and during the war some Latvians traveled to live and work in Ukrainian provinces of the Russian empire and secondly the Latvian officers who served the Russian army were sent on duty there. Large numbers of Latvians ended up in Ukraine as refugees during 1915-1916. Also campaigners for Latvian independence were interested in Ukrainian independence movement and were seeking for cooperation. On September 8-15 (21-28) in Kyiv the UCR organized “congress of the minor nations” where 80 representatives took part along with 10 from Latvia. Latvians were represented by Zigfrīds Anna Meierovics from Vidzeme land council Kristaps Bahmanis from Kurzeme Land council and Staņislavs Kambala from Latgale land council. Z. A. Meierovics gave speech describing the history of Latvian history and present situation and voiced call for Latvian self-determination. Meierovics, Kambala, Bahmanis and lecturer at Kyiv University M Bruninieks were elected in All-Russia Council of Nations. On November 18 1917 in Valka the newly founded Latvian National Council (LNC) also discussed Ukraine and judged that Ukrainian politicians are generally friendly towards Latvians like rest of the small nations. On December the Council received telegram from UNR about their declaration of independence and replied back with warm greetings towards Ukraine and voiced support for Ukrainian freedom and federation of nations.

On January 1918 LNC decided to send representatives to Ukraine to gain support promised by UCR. At first Latvians wanted to travel to Brestlitovsk to take part in Ukrainian-German peace talks to gain things to their favor, however the idea was dropped and Latvian representative K Bahmanis went to Kyiv on February. There he contributed to the creation of Kyiv Latvian Central Committee and spread information about the work of LNC. Because of war activities he could not contact Latvia and his report about his activities was only reviewed in June. Bahmanis became the representative of the Latvian Provisional Government in Kyiv and since 1919 visited new governments in Georgia, Armenia, White Guard Armies in Crimea, Don and Kuban. He returned to Latvia in September 1920.

Latvian General Pēteris Radziņš who served in UNR amy

Many Latvians who were at Ukraine decided to join Ukrainian national armed forces lead by General Pavlo Skoropadskyi. Latvian officers also served in Symon Petliura Directory army. Most known was colonel Pēteris Radziņš who was chief of organizational and training department of the General Staff. After hetman was deposed he served as deputy to the chief of General Staff Mykola Yunakiv. On September 1919 escaping UNR defeats against White Guards and Bolsheviks he got himself in Poland and then returned to Latvia. There he was appointed for the Chief of the Commander-in-Chief Staff of the Latvian army. From 1924 to 1928 he was commander-in-chief of the Latvian Army. He also was author of many military history books and died in age of 50 in 1930. Lieutenant Colonel Jānis Ceplītis served Skoropadsyi and then under Petliura was chief of the Operational department of the General Staff and returned to Latvia on December 1919. Captain Pēteris Miķelsons on 1918 voluntarily joined the hetman’s army in the Chief Artillery headquarters and was promoted to lieutenant colonel. In Petliura army he served as chief of Inspectional department of Chief Artillery headquarters. On January 1920 he was retired, but as Ukrainians started attack with Poles he was mobilized again. On 1921 he was promoted colonel and was retired few months later. Collegium assessor Vilhelms Klotiņš joined the hetman’s army on June 1918 and served in Petliura army as administrative colonel the chief of the board of main intendancy money and payments. He returned to Latvia on Summer 1919. Aviator captain Nikolajs Jeske on December 1918 joined Petliura’s army as deputy for the chief 5th aviation division later chief of Proskuriv (now Khmelnytskyi) aviation school and commander of 1st aviation detachment. On 1920-1921 he was the head of UNR aircraft purchase commission. Staff captain Hermanis Klīve on December 1918 served in hetmans army but after coup he was sent to court as hetmans officer but was found not guilty. He then served Poltava regiment until March 1920. Podporuchik Kārlis Drengeris served in UNR army 3th detached engineer battalion until September 1920. Podporuchik Arnolds Drukēvičs from December 18 to May 1919 served in UNR 7th artillery brigade and was captured by Poles. Adrejs Lejasslauss on 1918 took important posts in hetmans Provisions ministry and after coup served Provisions ministry in Galicia and Bukovina later in Ministry of Economics as vice-director Leather industry department and later director. Kārlis Brože served in most effective UNR unit the 1 Cavalry Regiment of Black Zaporizhians as commanders deputy, later in Latvia he served in police and municipalities.

As of diplomatic relations the first contacts between Latvia and UNR emerged on spring 1919 in Paris Peace Conference. UNR as most politically unstable country of the time was mainly interested in gaining support from Latvia. The Latvian foreign minister Z. A Meierovics considered Ukraine as ally and wanted to include Belarus and Ukraine into Baltic entente that compromised Baltic Sates, Finland and Poland. Belarusian and Ukrainian delegations took part in Dorpat (Tartu) Baltic states conference as observers. In meetings with them it was agreed to create a common military alliance. On September 1 1919 UNR consul Nikifor Bederovsky arrived in Riga. The UNR consulate managed to get some Ukrainians in Latvian army to retire and join the UNR army. Along with new UNR citizens some were Germans as consul deputy Erich Fleisher who asked Latvian General staff to command him to Jelgava for “consulate affairs” on November 28 1919 (Jelgava was just liberated from Bermont-Avalov army) and was granted. His goal was to search for UNR citizen local German Heinnrich Brade who voluntary joined Baltic Landguard on July 14 during his duty in Riga Latvian soldiers confiscate his bicycle that became point of active communications between consulate and Latvian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Fleisher himself was local German.

Latvia and UNR consulate sometimes entered situations of conflict during siege of Riga on October-November 1919. On October 24 UNR consulate filed a request to give back horse that was confiscated to consulate coachman Mykola Jukatch however was denied. In result UNR together with Belarus, Lithuania and Estonia filed nota to Foreign ministry where it protested against search-ins in one of the consular buildings and car confiscation by Latvian army and expulsions and mobilizations of their citizens. The nota demanded to make assertive steps until 8 December 12:00 or else the consulates will inform the representatives of Etente and make similar steps towards Latvian citizens in their territory. UNR was concerned by significant flow of refugees of Ukrainian nationals from Russia into Latvia. Latvian Foreign Ministry mostly supported the consulate and even gave it a credit for refugee transit and organization of the courier service.

Latvia and UNR also had numerous contacts in other countries. In London, Great Britain Latvian representative Georgs Bisenieks and UNR counterpart Yaroslavl Olesnitsky made regular meetings informing each other of the military events in both countries. In Warsaw, Poland the Latvian representative Atis Ķeniņš considered an establishment with UNR a top priority. He reported to Prime Minister Kārlis Ulmanis that Ukrainians eagerly wants to make friends with Latvia from whom they want to receive support such as military instructors and aides for economic recovery. Ukrainians also hoped that after liberation of Daugavpils, Ukraine could receive a transit of clothing, shoes and ammunition for its army of 200 000 men. Atis Ķeniņš in talks with Ukrainian side suggested that Latvian Provisional government needs to send emissary to Kyiv. On December 10 1919 the head of UNR directory Symon Petliura with UNR foreign minter A.Lvicky gave nota to Keniņš in Poland where they recognized Latvian independence and their Provisional Government.

On January 2 1920 Volodomir Kedrosky arrived in Riga to establish UNR diplomatic mission. The diplomatic mission was located at Antonija iela 6 (presently within the territory of the Russian embassy). In spring a UNR press bureau was established that informed Latvian press about military and political events in UNR. UNR expected that Latvia will recognize their independence in return without delay. However, Latvian priority was to gain acceptance from Poland first as both countries shared important military ties and shared common border. Only after Latvian –Polish relations suffered brief deadlock after failed talks in Warsaw in March 1920 on March 25 Z. A. Meierovics sent nota to Symon Petliura where he recognized UNR independence. Polish emissary Bronislav Boufal expressed disappointment and call it a result of change in relations between Poland and Latvia. A. Meierovics explained his policy in People’s council on March 10 where he rejected Polish demand to restore the Polish borders of 1776 that would include Belarus and Ukraine. He instead accented the need for sovereign countries in Belarus and Ukraine and reviewed the UNR situation as difficult regarding its relations with Soviet Russia who is not looking for peace with UNR and instead has created a rival Ukrainian Soviet Republic. Polish society was generally against Ukrainian and Belarusian independence while Polish government including General Jozef Pilsudsky was cautiously supportive. Meanwhile UNR military representative in Poland colonel general Viktor Zelinsky asked Latvian military representative Mārtins Hartmanis to support the transfer of Ukrainian soldiers within former units of Yudenich White Guard army stationed in Alūksne to Ukraine including Belarusian general S. Bulak-Balahovich of whose 884 men 24% were Ukrainians. While Latvian side expressed support the UNR mission in Riga was not interested and did not make any contacts with Latvian General Staff. As joint Polish and Ukrainian offensive started Latvian side asked to find out if within soviet prisoners of war there are Ukrainians who could be sent to UNR and found 11 men. However, UNR diplomatic mission did not respond.

On June 2 1920 in Vinnytsia UNR governmental declaration stated that it’s in most importance to have good neighboring relations with Romania and gain most positive agreement with solidary Baltic States. For that reason on June 2 all Latvian citizens serving in UNR army were relieved of duty as both countries have recognized each other. In return Latvia promised to work on refugee re evacuation to Ukraine. Latvian government sent the representative of Refugee re-evacuation society to Ukraine Stulmanis who on June 1 arrived in Kovel and June 3 in Zhytomyr to make talks with Polish military who was widely responsive and then planned to go to Kyiv, but as situation in front quickly changed he was forced to head back to Latvia.

In August 6 1920 in Bulduri the Baltic States conference was opened to discuss foreign affairs between Baltic countries. UNR tried to gain direct entry into conference. Ukrainian and Belarusian people’s republics sent applications and sent a delegation of journalist Alexander Sadikovsky, V, Kedrovsky, A, Shlugin, economist Mykola Dobrilovsky, businessman S, Frankfurt and L, Zadorzhnij. The head of Lithuanian delegation Jons Šaulis on August 19 issued declaration where he expressed concerns over Ukrainian participation as it would cause protest from Soviet Russia and also doubted the need of Ukrainian participation in the Baltic States conference. Lithuanians however, would still participate even if Ukrainians were admitted. On August 20 it was decided that Belarus cannot take part while UNR can take part as full-time member of the conference. UNR issued memorandum about their state history and current demands and interests. On August 31 UNR representatives signed the project for political convention where member states committed for joint de iure recognition and settle their quarrels in a peaceful way. Few days later a military council was made to create a joint military convention (Lithuania stepped out of it for political reasons) UNR representative colonel Danilchuk and lieutenant colonel Didkovsky. The project for military convention was concluded on October 18-30 that had to be approved by all five member states. Both these conventions were never realized.

Month later in September 21 1920 in Riga Poland and Soviet Union came to discuss peace agreement. Also Soviet Ukraine delegation took part. On October 5 a ceasefire was signed after which UNR senator present in Riga V. Sheluhin and chief of the diplomatic mission V. Kedrovsky gave nota to head of the Polish delegation Jan Dabski where they protested that UNR and Polish diplomatic relations were not taken into concern and UNR had to take part in peace talks. Same nota was also given to Latvian side. Meanwhile Latvia was concerned over the fate of thousands of Latvian refugees in Soviet controlled Ukraine and decided to start talks with Ukrainian Socialist Soviet Republic causing UNR protest that reminded of joint independence recognition and that Ukrainian Socialist Soviet Republic is just puppet regime by Soviet occupants. On February 19 1921 Latvia replied that it always supports the Ukrainian strive for freedom, but the real situation demands to hold talks with power presently in Ukraine. On February 21 1921 UNR diplomatic mission left Latvia and closed the consulate. On May 1921 both Latvian and Ukrainian Socialist Soviet representatives met and both recognized each other’s sovereignty. Thus the Latvian and UNR relations were completely canceled even if year later the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic ceased to exist as sovereign state and was included into Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics.

Latvian and Ukrainian relations during 1917-1921 was based on mutual sympathy even more than between Latvia and Belarus. Contrary to Belarussian People’s Republic the UNR had more chances to establish independent nation and therefore received more international support. However, similar to Belarus it could not survive the wars with Soviets, Poles and anarchist warlords. Plus it was disturbed by its own inner power struggle. Had the events for UNR inside Ukraine would be more fortunate the relations between Latvia and UNR would continue in positive environment as contrary to Belarus both countries had no territorial or ethno-political issues. However, Latvian foreign policy was based on realpolitik – after the Polish-Soviet peace agreement ­it was clear that UNR has no more possibility to exist and Latvia moved on to start talks with Soviet Ukraine. As Latvian top priority was to gain peace agreement with Soviets and settle the refugee question. Today Ukraine is top priority to Latvia foreign policy. Latvian policy is to support Ukraine in its struggle against Russia and it does not recognize Russian occupation of Crimea. Both sides supports each other in various way. However, one must always beware from times when fates of many are dictated by realpolitik and survival.

Just one week left before the most important political event in United States of America and arguably the rest of the world. An average American voter may think it only matters their own country and interior policy, but US still has responsibility towards many parts of the world especially Baltic States and rest of Eastern Europe. That is why this statement will be more about the election outcome influence on foreign policy and our security. The interior policy and economic issues in these elections is something more important to US citizens themselves then your foreign policy to us which importance inside US is often neglected.

During Cold War years when US policy was always to assure that it will never recognize Soviet occupation of the Baltic States and support anti-soviet resistance; the US presidential candidates often met with Baltic exiles. They also tried to apply to exiles of the Eastern Block and captive nations of the Soviet Union like Ukrainians. Now 25 years after the “end” of Cold War such meetings and reach outs never happen. During presidential debates the question of Ukrainian conflict was never raised and only the question of US support for NATO was mentioned briefly. The current adversary for Baltic States – Russia was only mentioned as in form of Syria and DNC email hacks. Now why Russia is keyword in these elections?

Back in past both US ruling parties have made their ups and downs with Russia/Soviet Union. Franklin Delano Roosevelt conceded Baltic States to Soviet Union, while his successor Harry Truman ignited confrontation to deter further soviet expansion. Republican Dwight Eisenhower warned of the rise of the military industrial complex in result of arms race. Democrat John F. Kennedy did his best to neutralize the Soviet missile threat in Cuba and reached upper hand in arms race. Republican Richard Nixon and Democrat Jimmy Carter attempted to create a détente with Soviet Union which only lead to breakdown after Soviet invasion in Afghanistan. Republicans Ronald Reagan and George Bush used Soviet weakness to win the first Cold War and witnessed the fall of the Soviet Block.

Since then the following US presidential candidates have failed to understand the Soviet successor state – Russian Federation. Bill Clinton hoped for democratic change in Russia and even hoped for partnership. What western powers failed to understand that despite the communist removal from power, the soviet ruling elite or nomenklatura remained in power, but most importantly the Praetorian guard of the Soviet Union – the KGB and Army elite kept their position. They were determined prevent desovietization, prevent the transition to liberal democracy and revenge on US for the breakdown of the Soviet Union. In the end they succeeded to install their member Vladimir Putin an ex KGB Lieutenant colonel, who in his 17 years of rule have returned the so-called “siloviki” to their past prominence. Vladimir Putin’s foreign policy is based on deception, forgery, sabotage and use of outright force when it’s needed.

Republican George W Bush at first as many did not decode Putin and his government, but later started more assertive approach. During Bush administration despite Russian resistance whole Eastern Europe and Baltic States was admitted to NATO, however Bush did not rush to create constant NATO military presence in the Baltic States. A major Bush and other NATO leaders mistake was not to reach common ground on admitting Ukraine and Georgia into NATO. Germany and France resisted to assign a road map for these countries while Putin openly threatened that Ukraine will only enter NATO without its Eastern and Southern part. To prevent Georgia from joining NATO and EU Russia invaded Georgia, and witnessed impotence from US and EU countries who could not defend Georgia. Some say that US fleet presence in Black Sea was the factor to stop full occupation of Georgia, while other say that French president Nicola Sarkozy managed to make a deal on dividing Georgia and leave Russian occupied territories as unrecognized republics to Russians for the common good. Russian leadership understood that it can be done again in future. As Russia provoked Georgia into attacking first, Georgia was scapegoated and no western sanctions followed. Russia did it first strike, but that was not a wakeup call.

Democrat Barack Obama first 4 years were catastrophic in relations with Russia. At first Obama failed to understand that de iure president Dmitri Medvedev was not de facto and any direct talks with him excluding then Prime Minister Putin would result in nothing. But, the greatest blunder was the so-called “reset” button that then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton brought to Moscow. In attempt to normalize relations since Georgian war Clinton gifted the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavror a with a red button with the English word “reset” and the Roman alphabet transliteration of the Russian Cyrillic alphabet word “peregruzka”. Only the word “peregruzka” in Russian means overload. And that is what this attempt of new détente lead to. Obama administration abandoned important plans for rocket defense bases in Poland, Baltic States and Eastern Europe was placed on second plan while Obama sought unrealistic goals for nuclear disarming a thing Russia could not possibly agree. When US and NATO countries entered the civil war in Libya, then prime minister Putin witnessed Gaddafi’s horrible death as direct threat to him and ignited his will to return to Presidential post. As from 2012 scared by unexpected opposition towards his third presidency Putin started a consolidation of power and confrontation with the west, who he blamed for trying to topple his regime and his puppet regimes in Belarus, Ukraine and Central Asia.

Obama one last mistake towards Russia was the “red line in the sand” – failed promise to make military action against Syrian regime in case of use of chemical weapons. Obama who made this promise unwillingly for himself instead fell for Putin’s intimidation and agreed for deal with Russia and Assad that kept him in power. By doing so he aided popularity for so-called Islamic State (Daesh) radicals and created environment where Russia can directly intervene in Syrian war. Thus Putin no longer recognized Obama as competitive rival. What happened in 2014 in Ukraine we all know. Obama seemingly have learned for their past mistakes. Sanctions are in place and finally what had to be done many years before – a constant NATO military presence is being enforced in Baltic States. In last few months the relations between US and Russia has deteriorated so much that Russia is openly preparing for possible nuclear war and has moved nuclear capable rockets to Baltic region. And that is where the US elections comes in.

Republican party has been taken over by arrogant millionaire who believes he can become a president without any political experience and who leads a fight against so-called establishment. Donald Trump is alarming for Baltic States and Eastern Europe for dozens of things. He suggests that he may only help those countries that pays them enough, practically its gang ransom diplomacy and is against the principles of NATO. Baltic States desperately are trying to balance their national budgets to increase spending for defense, but its obvious that they can’t do it alone. Latvia right now has created a good defense assurance relations with Canada, but if US drops its leading position in NATO it’s a signal towards Russia that it could possibly avoid major war if it decides to tamper with Baltic States. Trump has many times stated sympathies for Putin and his regime and using Russian propaganda slogans in his campaign. He even uses conspiracy theories that first appears in sites like Russia Today and to add he is even endorsed by pro-Russian conspiracy theorist Alex Jones. He has stated that Crimea is “Europes problem” and is better off with Russia, he has removed past Republican promise to send weapons for Ukraine. He states that Russia only fights Daesh and has no problem it with massacring the people in Aleppo with their bombings. Most importantly he pretends that he is not sure if Russia is behind DNC email hack and Russian connection to Wikileaks. He says that CIA and FBI can’t be trusted, however he praises FBI for his new probe into Hillary Clintons emails. Trump himself might not be Russian agent, but his many campaign aids and supporters are and Russia is directly interested in person who may disrupt things on global scale. Russian strategy of divide and conquer is to use western democracy to install Russia friendly regimes in Europe. They have succeeded in Hungary, partly in Slovakia and Greece. Russia supported Brexit in UK and supports right-wing and leftist radicals in Germany, Italy and France. Now Trump is Putin’s greatest gamble that might turn things into his favor. Trump is most unpredictable and dangerous candidate since Barry Goldwater.

Now Hillary Clinton is full of uncertainties too. It’s beyond prediction how her email saga will end, it could end with acquittal or it could end with impeachment. Clinton who pushed the ‘overload’ button now feels the bitter taste of fruits of her failed foreign policy. Russian secret service tries to undermine her election campaign, her intentions of imposing no fly zone in Syria is met with threats of world war. Clinton uses strong words calling Putin the adversary, accusing of Trump of being his puppet and warns of Putin’s intention. We can only hope that if she is elected she will keep up to this and not forgive Russian attack on her campaign. Last thing we need is another “reset” button. But for this reason Clinton cannot be fully trusted.

No matter who will be elected, both of them and all US citizens will have to stand ready for even greater trouble from Russia. First Russia has already ramped up its military presence in Kaliningrad and around Baltic eastern borders. One day it will break up the ceasefire in Ukraine completely when it feels the conditions are perfect for that. Russia is increasing its presence in Syria and provoking NATO into confrontation. If Russia sees that Baltic States are not defended well enough and US lacks leadership to help them it may mount an invasion here.

If Donald Trump will be elected he must certainly feel some gratitude for Putin for contributing for his campaign. Trump will probably again try to make a new détente with Russia, giving her free hand in Syria and limit US presence in Eastern Europe and Baltic States. History teaches that every deal with Russia is not the worth the paper it’s written. Once Trump will witness that Russia endangers his own country a new confrontation will begin. Question – will it not be too late for Baltic States?

If Hillary Clinton is elected and that’s what Russia fears from, the confrontation will continue. If Clinton stays committed to be prime time member of NATO and support Baltic States with military presence it will result in even higher Russian military increase to intimidate her. Question how long Russian economy can hold such arms race­­ – that was one of the reasons why Nazi Germany moved to war in 1939. If Clinton will impose no fly zone in Syria and indict Russia with war crimes then Russia might instigate a crisis situation even involving US casualties. Nerves of steel will be needed to avoid a direct confrontation. Clinton following Obama’s footsteps probably will not arm Ukraine, but keep sanctions. That will not make Ukrainian situation any easier. Lastly Baltic States if ever gets victims of war – then it could happen as consequence of US – Russian conflict in Syria or a last final gamble for Putin’s regime to keep its power prestige and save economy by “short victorious war”.

In both ways the world can expect many dangers after November 8. A dangers that may even went to nuclear war. Russian leadership has nothing to lose. If the regime falls they will lose all their looted millions, mansions and even their lives. They would rather end their existence in war that future Russian generations will blame on foreign powers rather their own leaders and themselves. Russian openly shows its people and the world that is ready even for nuclear war. US and Europe should also tell its citizens its ready for a war with Russia or China if such occurs. We cannot pretend that such threat does not involves us and this 70 year-long peace that was only possible thanks to strong acts of deterrence. In last 25 years the deterrence was naively removed and has caused a greatest global security threat since 1961.

It’s up to US voters to determine the fate of their nation and many other nations. And remember in democratic countries the elections are determined by those who did not vote. …Or Russian hackers. For all US citizens, friends of Latvia, people who study Baltic affairs let this be a warning to make your decision with full responsibility as you will be making history and future for all of us.

Comments Off on US Presidential Elections: Importance for Latvia and Eastern Europe

The refugee crisis in Europe has also affected Latvian society. Latvia as EU country is taking part in handling the crisis and has agreed to accept to host at least 776 refugees from Syria, Libya and other countries. Meanwhile the country is already holding a large number of refugees who managed to cross the Latvian border. They are from various Muslim countries including Afghanistan. In following years Latvia might experience an influx of Muslim immigrants in form of refugees or work seekers. Although by no means Latvia is one of the most desired places for Middle Eastern refugees, on the contrary Latvia with its economic issues and rough climate is one of the lest desired. Also the knowledge and contact between Latvia and Middle Eastern Muslim countries have been limited. But, that does not mean that this will be first time in Latvian history when a new ethno-religious community will emerge. Muslims in small numbers have lived in Latvia since 19th century and their presence has increased in last two decades. This is a story about first Muslim communities in Latvia and how they evolved in the restored independent country. The therm Muslim is used here as for followers of Islam. The Islam is transnational religion, and various national groups practicing Islam who had lived and lives in Latvia are described here. Lastly the phenomena of last twenty years is the growing numbers of Latvian converters who will be mentioned here in the end.

Before Crusades at 8th to 11th century trough Viking traders the Arabian silver Dirhams reached Latvian territory bringing first artifacts of the emerging Muslim civilization in Baltic pagan lands. First direct contacts with Muslims in Latvian territory goes back to 13th century when the Tatars of the Golden Horde took part in raids against Livonia hosted by Russian Duchies. During the Livonian War (1558-1583) it said that around 40 000 Tatar and Russian soldiers under the command of the Han Shahghali and later Simeon Bekbulatovich took part in the Muscovite invasion. Many centuries later during Russian-Turkish war on 1877, hundred Turkish prisoners of war were brought to Cēsis and Līvāni district. The land where they were settled became known as the Turki parish. 26 Turks died of illnesses and bad weather, but others survived and settled in the city of Cēsis. There they opened Turkish Bakery. The Turkish cemetery was opened in Cēsis and has been preserved and restored by the help of the Turkish consulate. Turkish cemeteries have been built elsewhere in Latvia, where mostly Turkish war prisoners were taken.

Tatar community in Latvian territory emerged at the last half of the 19th century, mostly from immigrants who came to industrialized cities like Riga, Jelgava and Daugavpils. On 1890 the local Tatar leaders mullah Muhamet Shakir Abdul Arapov, Abdulla Myazhitov and Kurma Hamet Ishniyezov pleaded to establish Muslim cemetery next to Catholic cemetery in Pletenberg street (now Aizsaules street). On 1902 first Muslim congregation was established. The local imam was Ibragim Davidov, who soon opened the first house of prayer. According to the 1897 all Russia census there were 1 541 Tatars living in Latvian parts of the Russian empire. 920 of them served in the Russian army. There were also small amount Bashkirs and Kyrgyzs who also served in the army. 3/4 of the local Muslims were illiterates and mostly were peasants. The Muslim soldiers after the end of duty headed back to home. Some few tens of Muslim civilians lived here permanently who mostly were small time traders. 564 Tatars lived in Daugavpils that had major Russian war fortification’s. On 1913 510 Muslims mostly soldiers lived in Riga and close areas. Most of them lived in Moscow District in Riga and mainly spoke in Tatar or Turkish. According to their reports on 1914 their congregation had 1000 members. However, if excluding the temporary soldiers the Muslim community in Riga and elsewhere was much smaller.

The First World war made most members of the Muslim community to leave Latvia. The imam Ibragim Davidov who was promoted mullah left Riga on 1917 after Germans captured Riga. Because Russia entered war against Ottoman Empire, there were repressions against few of the Turks. Turkish Bakeries were closed in Rīga and one Turkish house owner was arrested. During the War for Independence some Tatars previously fighting for the Red Army were conscripted into Latvian Armed forces. Around 25 Tatars served in the Latvian army up to 1920. Some of the Muslims came back to Latvia after the end of the war. The Latvian army even issued order for few of the Muslim soldiers to give holidays during Kurban Bayrami (Eid al-Adha) celebrations. On April 1920 Tatar Hassan Haretdinov-Konikov came to Riga from Finland and tried to acquire the objects belonging to Riga House of Prayer. He insisted all the Muslims of Riga have relocated to Finland. The 24 consecrated carpets and Quran was not given to him by Latvian authorities because the Riga congregation was not legally closed and its members might come back. Then Hassan Haretdinov-Konikov unsuccessfully pleaded to the Ministry of Justice to build Mosque in Riga.

On July 1920 the Riga Muslim Council elected Turkish cafeteria-bakery owner Shakir Husnetdinov as deputy imam. On 1928 he was officially appointed by Latvian Spiritual affairs council as permanent imam of Riga. The prayers and ceremonies were held in the imams apartment at the Marijas street 48. Although Hustedinov was not allowed to register marriages despite many pleas to the Latvian authorities. On 1920 there were 115 Tatars and 19 Turks. There were 130 registered Muslim men (2 of them Latvians) and 32 woman. On 1925 census 9 Poles were registered as Muslims. On 1935 just 66 Muslims were counted in the last national census before world war. The Riga congregation had only 42 members left. 39 Tatars, 28 Turks, 17 Persians, and 1 Syrian were counted in the census. Comparing to other minorities such as Jews who were 4% of the state population the Muslim minority in Latvia was overly marginal.

On 1940 Soviets occupied Latvia. Some of the Muslims were repressed. Tatar Abdula Husnetdin disappeared. One Tatar of noble ancestry was arrested in hotel “Roma” cafeteria and tried to poison himself to avoid arrest. The Nazi occupation did not make remaining Muslims flee. on 1943 40 Tatars and 35 Turks were registered by Nazi authorities. Some of them were prisoners of war from the Red Army. Germans also brought some Tatars to Latvia for work. Mullah Shakir Husnetdinov continued to serve as leader of the community. As the soviets came back most members of the interwar community left Latvia including Shakir Husnetdinov. Trader Alimzhan Husnetdin with his Latvian wife spent first post war years in Latvian refugee camp in West Germany. Almost all original interwar Latvian Muslim community was lost, only few remained.

The new wave of Muslim immigrants emerged during Soviet occupation and was part of the overall influx of the immigrants from the Soviet Union. First who came after the war were retired Soviet soldiers and officers with their family. Few of the Crimean Tatars who were deported on 1944 after being rehabilitated moved to their army relatives in Latvia. On 1959 census there were 1 811 Tatars, also people from soviet Central Asian republics and Caucasus came. The number of the Tatars grew steadily: on 1970 2 671, on 1979 3 764, on 1989- 3 168. New Azeri and Chechen communities emerged along with those of Central Asia. One part of them were Russianized, spoke Russian and had abandoned the Muslim traditions. Others still kept their identity and traditions. Crimean Tatar Refat Chubarov was a long time director of the Latvian State Archive. Currently he is a Chairman of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People and lives in exile after Russian occupation of Crimea.

The religious practice in many cases were kept unofficially as the soviet authorities regarding religious organizations issued restrictive measures. There were now official house of prayers, rituals were carried out in private apartments. On 1958 the mother of Riga Muslim Congregational council chairman Rufiya Sheviryova who was member of the Jēkabpils district soviet managed to establish a Muslim Cemetery in the Jēkabpils next to Jewish cemetery. Before that the Muslims were laid to rest in the Jewish cemetery causing protests.

After the regain of independence many Muslims left Latvia for their ethnic homelands. The size of Tatars dropped from 3 168 in 1989 to 2 164 in 2011. 2765 Azeris lived in Latvia on 1989 but dropped to more a half four years later. Large numbers of Crimean Tatars returned to Crimea. Remaining Tatars and Azeris have established cultural societies. The “Ideļ” for Tatars and “Azeri” for Azeris. The Chechen Diaspora became active because of Chechen War of Independence. Their representatives tried to convince Latvian authorities to recognize the Republic of Chechnya and open its embassy albeit unsuccessfully. The “Chechen Mafia” scare has been present in Latvia, as some Chechen businessman have been accused of criminal actions. They also been attributed to have political influence on some of the Latvian political parties. However, none of the Caucasian Muslim communities have ever posed serious threat to Latvian state and society.

As Latvia became member of EU, some sparked fear of the influx of economical immigrants from Turkey and other Muslim lands. That did not happen, most representatives of the Middle East states are foreign exchange students and small number of permanent settlers. In recent years illegal immigrants who crossed Latvian-Russian or Latvian-Belarusian border from various countries as Afghanistan, Kurdistan, Pakistan, Syria and others have been living in detention centers. Small numbers of them have asked for permanent stay in Latvia, as they view Latvia as transit point to other EU countries. They have general problems learning Latvian and find work. If the state is considering to settle immigrants currently displaced in other EU countries, serious considerations needs to be taken of how to integrate them, teach Latvian language and involve them in to jobs. Permanent living in migrant center and constant living on small state benefits will cause long therm problems.

The presence of Islam as religion in Latvia has been so far mostly invisible. The only House of prayers are located in Rīga, Brīvības street 104. First Muslim congregation in Riga was Ideļ established on 1993. Muslim congregations were established also in Jēkabpils and Daugavpils. The Riga Imam since 1997 is Tatar Midhat Satdanov. There is 15 Muslim congregations in Latvia with no united umbrella organization. On 2005 the Lebanese Christian Arab doctor Hosam Abu Meri established Latvian Arab Center who unites the members of the Latvian Arabs, who are around 120 people currently in Latvia as claimed by the center webpage. On 2011 The Latvian Islamic Center was established with Zufars Zainullin as the chairman. On 2013 he was replaced by Imran Oleg Petrov. 2015 he was replaced by Hamza Jānis Līciņs. The members and visitors of this center is mostly foreign students and Latvian convertees. The number of ethnic Latvians converted to Islam is small, but some of these members consider them more religious then their native Muslim counterparts.

The influence of the Muslim culture on Latvian nation has increased in last two decades. The Kebab shops are common sight in Riga, Middle Eastern motives can be seen in Latvian music and art. There is fairly common interest in Islamic culture. The University of Latvia has opened Asian Study Chamber with the leading expert on Islamic culture professor Leons Taivāns. The Holy book of Quran has been translated twice in Latvian. Egypt and Turkey are common tourist routes for Latvians. Generally Latvians are no stranger to Islamic culture. There also been many cases of mixed marriages and international contacts. However, the ongoing war on terrorism and recent refugee crisis has sparked the rise of islamophobia within Latvian society. Fear that terrorist acts that took place in Europe may take place in Latvia, fear from more immigrants of unknown culture have divided the Latvian society. The division is also boosted by far right nationalistic party who is in the government.

Latvia has always been a multicultural country. The history shows that Muslims were rather marginal and silent part of the diverse nations in Latvia. It could stay like this or is about to change. The historic Muslims in Latvia where Turks and Tatars and Caucasians. The tides of history may bring numbers of newcomers from Middle East a region that Latvia yet has very low connection. Latvian society has been tolerant and accepting and xenophobic at the same time. Muslims in Western Europe went trough decades to integrate and its apparent that full integration has not yet taken place. For Latvia it will take tens of more years. Currently Latvian society is not ready for new influx of newcomers from Muslim world. So if Latvia do face such new of migration it will be one of the grandest challenges of our times. Lets us remind however, that looking back at Latvian-non-Latvian relations; the relations where not without issues and misunderstandings, but always common ground was reached between the two sides. Latvians must accept Muslims, but Muslims despite our cultural distances must accept Latvians and their way of life. This is the life long challenge for all of us.

On May 14 1948, the State of Israel declared its independence. It was the realization of hopes and dreams of many of the Holocaust survivors. Large masses moved to the new country, others watched it from their homes at the Diaspora. In Soviet Union it was pretty much different. Despite initially supporting the Israeli independence, Soviet Union maintained hostile policy towards Israel for next five decades. Despite Soviet Union having one of the largest numbers of Holocaust victims and survivors, its policy was anti-Semitic and unfriendly towards the Jews in Soviet Union. The Soviet Anti-Semitism was not genocidal as the Nazi was. It was more oriented towards full assimilation, oppressive atheism and anti-Zionism. Soviet ideology was generally against practicing Judaism and embracing the Jewish national identity. In such climate the Jews around the Soviet Union had to choose between assimilation into Russian speaking “Soviet nation” devoid of religion and national values or resist. The resistance was not always active and open. The resistance was trying to preserve and maintain their religious values, commemorate the victims of the Holocaust and protesting to gain rights to immigrate to Israel. The post-war Latvia was one of the active parts of this resistance. The survivors and the newcomers all had to through the same choices that others had in the Soviet Union. At the end on late eighties the Latvian Jewish community was again on path to revival and restoration of the independent Jewish community.

The Holocaust in Latvia killed about 75 thousand Latvian Jews. Only 15 thousand people managed to escape Latvia to the depths of the Soviet Union. A large number of Latvian Jews were deported by the Soviets on June 14 1941 mass deportations. Those who survived the camps later returned to Latvia. Not all returned, but those who did, found their pre-war life’s completely destroyed. There were no synagogues, no Jewish organizations; most of the old Jewish community was destroyed. On 1959 in Soviet Latvia there were 36 600 Jewish nationals 1,75% of the population, 80% of them living in Riga. Only 100 000 of them were born in pre war Latvia as large numbers of soviet Jews moved to live and work in soviet Latvia. Just 48% of them had Yiddish as their native tongue, 50% of them spoke Russian. In next decades the newcomers from Russia and other places overcome the native Latvian Jews. However in many cases they were united in their struggles against the Soviet assimilation policies.

The Jewish struggle against assimilation can be divided in two major parts. First: the preservation of religion, maintaining the religious values in defiance of the official atheist policy. Judaism is the most important aspect of the Jewish identity so it was crucial to keep and maintain it. Officially the Soviet constitution allowed religious practice that is separated from the state and schools. However, the Soviet authorities always tried to interfere in the affairs of the countries many churches and cults. The main authority concerning religious groups was the Council for the Affairs of the Religious Cults. At first the CARC was unable to control the Jewish congregations because of their small size and lack of unified spiritual center. Also because of transport problems, the religious live in rural towns was left beyond observation. The CARC representative Voldemārs Šeškens had very scarce knowledge about the Jewish religion and how to control it. He did not even know if the Soviet Union has any chief rabbi.

Despite that he began registering the Jewish congregations across Latvia. To register a congregation at least 20 people were needed, who then had to found a place for prayer and submit registration papers to local executive committee. It also had to be approved by the KGB. If all sides approved then: the registry application had to be sent to Moscow where the People’s Commissar Council (later the Council of the Soviet Ministers) approved in the last instance. On 1949 seven congregations with 6 “cult servicemen” were registered across Latvia. Two in Riga, one in Tukums, Ludza, Krāslava, Rēzekne and Daugavpils. However, there were also unregistered congregations with people unofficially or approved only by local authorities like in Jēkabpils, Liepāja, Ventspils ect. Most of the synagogues in Latvia were destroyed or damaged during the Holocaust, so it was difficult or impossible for the 20 people congregations to restore them. The only fully working synagogue in Latvia was the Pietav street synagogue in Old Riga that was left completely unscarred. Many synagogues were turned into libraries, restaurants and even sport halls like in Tukums.

The state policy became more hostile on 1948 trying to exclude and limit the Jewish religion. Sanctions were made against the young people who attended synagogue; many new regulations prevented Jews from maintaining their traditions. The anti-religious campaign was boosted by official state hostility towards the new State of Israel and the anti-cosmopolite campaign. Many of the religious activists were arrested and accused for the national treason. On 1953 the anti-Jewish campaign reached climax when the so-called “Doctors Trial” in Moscow boosted great fear of massive repressions towards the Jews. When the Riga Jews asked the Pietav Synagogue chief why there was no matzo bought this year, he replied “How can I ask for matzo if the head of the state himself (Stalin) writes anti-Semitic sounding article in the newspaper? One of the dearest rumors was that Stalin is preparing a mass Jewish deportation to Siberia. So far, no compelling documentary evidence have been found, but as Russian archives remain closed for the most part, it’s possible that such deportation was planned. After Stalin’s death the repressions against the Jews were ceased.

State policy became more liberal towards religion excluding the arrests and repressions. However, the anti-religious propaganda was omnipresent and often ignited hate and misunderstanding from the locals. On sixties as the Jewish national movement became strong worldwide the restriction and suspicion against the Jewish congregations became more severe. The new CARC rules removed the juridical status of the congregations and became fully controlled by CARC representatives. Taxing was increased to maximum; the local authorities could close down the congregation without higher approval as in Tukums in 1961 when the congregation was closed down.

Maintaining religion to preserve national identity proved not was the only working answer to assimilation. Not only because of the state restriction, but also because religion was not favored by all the Jews as their mean of the self identity. On 20th century two new self identity factors appeared among Jews: Holocaust commemoration and the State of Israel. Both of these factors became a challenge as the Soviets viewed them with even more hostility.

Both in Europe and Soviet Union the Holocaust commemoration begun in full-scale in the beginning of the sixties, when the Eichmann trial and Israeli victories made to talk openly about the Jewish Genocide and ask retribution. In Soviet Union the Jewish genocide was overly not mentioned in state media and history books. Only right after the war until 1948 the state newspapers mentioned the Jewish victims killed by the Nazis. Some novels like the Vētra (The Storm) written by Vilis Lācis famous writer and soviet statesmen described the Jewish killings in Latvia. The KGB made Extraordinary Investigation Commission and punished most of culprits who took part in the killings. However, later the Jews killed in Soviet Union were just part of “soviet citizens killed by the fascists”. It was done to avoid mentioning one nation not to boost the much feared Jewish nationalism.

The Star of David made from barbed wire at Rumbula mass murder site removed by the soviets

The Soviet approved Rumbula memorial sign with hammer and sickle

In answer to that on sixties the first commemorative events started to take place in Rumbula, the mass killing site where 25,000 Jews were killed on November 30 , and December 8 1941. On 1961 first Jewish youth’s came to the site and started to mark the killing sites. The soviets were quick to issue warnings not to gather there. On 1962 first commemorative wooden plate was placed there. On 1963 at least every week people gathered to build memorial site. Artist J Kuzkovskis placed a large poster of Jew with squeezed fist rising from the grave in protest to what’s have bee done to him and his family. It was placed roadside alarming the soviets who removed the poster. After much friction between the state and the activists on 1964 a memorial stone was placed, with hammer and sickle and writing in three languages “For the victims of fascism 1941-1944”. Similar sites were made elsewhere, but not mentioning word “Jew”. Also if one dared to place the Star of David on the monument, he would be punished and the star removed. Soviets considered gatherings and seminars at the killing sites as the Zionist anti-soviet activity. Most of them were illegal, but were not dispersed, because sometimes more than 200 people came to them especially at Rumbula.

Soviet Union was hostile towards Zionism as it was Jewish Nationalism, and communism is primary against any kind of nationalism. However, on 1948 Stalin hoped that Israel would be ruled by leftist forces that would join the Soviet Block. Instead as in result of Arab-Israeli war the main force in the Israeli politics turned out to be right-wing Zionists; many of them having roots in Russia, Ukraine and Latvia. Soviet Union invested great sums to arm and train the Israeli enemy states Egypt, Jordan and Syria. During the times of Khrushchev, Soviet Union was the champion of the anti-Zionist ideology. It became even more active after the Six Days War on 1967 and Yom Kipur war on 1973 when Israeli military disgraced the Soviet Union by defeating the Arab states armed to teeth with the best Soviet weapons. The Israeli advances became known for many across the Soviet Union and movement begun to immigrate to Israel. However, the Soviets were against this and the resistance movement started across the union to gain rights to leave.

Jews in Latvia were active in this movement writing petitions to the Soviet government and international organizations. During the seventies more than 40% such letters came from Riga. The petitioners were called “otkazniks” (in Russian refused). 24 Riga “otkaznik’s” wrote open letter to UN. Grigorijs Mincs member of the prominent pre war family even approached the British MP Piter Archer and the UK embassy to grant him rights to leave. Protests and sit-ins were made by the “otkazniks” at the soviet authorities like on 1970 in Riga at the Latvian Soviet Supreme Council. On 1971 March 56 Jews from Riga arrived at Soviet Supreme Council at Moscow and gave a signed petition to allow them to leave and also free arrested activists. Along with them, people from Lviv, Vilnius, Kaunas and other cities. After being rejected, new letter signed by 165 people was addressed starting hunger strike that lasted for 26 hours that in first time in USSR history took place in state rooms. When they were threatened by militsyia (soviet police) they left the building only to return to Ministry of Interior next day. The marching Jews confused the people on the streets of Moscow and brought western media attention. The action took place in the same time as the 24th congress of the Communist party. Embarrassed soviets finally gave in and granted all previously rejected appeals to immigrate to Israel. Hunger strikes became frequent among many Latvian Jews who in such way protested to the denial of emigration or the arrest of their relatives.

One of the most radical methods to leave the Union was a plane hijack attempt by the Jews from Riga on 1970. A group of 16 people planned to hijack AN-26 passenger plane in Leningrad but, were arrested before doing so. Their trial caused protests both in Union and the west. Later four Jews were arrested in Riga for supporting the hijackers. One of the evidence for their guilt was illegal Jewish newspaper “Iton”. The Jewish illegal publishing was called “Samizdat” (Self Publishing). “Samizdat” was journals and books about the Jewish history and culture and religion. Soviets targeted this as anti-Soviet propaganda and often arrested the publisher. Getting in goods from Israel and making things with Jewish symbols also alarmed the soviets. Jews also organized private educative lectures, theatrical plays called “Purimshpīl” displaying stories from the Jewish cultural life. The Judaica lectures gathered people from all over the Union and abroad. Eventually rather large numbers of Jews managed to move to Israel. Not all stayed there however, and used legal rights to travel further to US or Western Europe to settle there.

Not all Jews choose to resist assimilation. For many it was easier to adopt Russian name to hide their Jewish identity and live the lives of the ordinary soviet citizen. Some of them became too assimilated and became Russian nationalists after the fall of the Union. Some only after the fall of the Union re-discovered their Jewish identity. In early 90ies Israel became overflowed with Jewish immigrants from all over the Soviet Union. About 1.6 million Jews from Ukraine, Belarus, Russia and the Baltic States settled in Israel making rapid changes in the society. Even the Arab tradesmen in the Old city of Jerusalem started to learn Russian.

Star of David along the Latvian flag at the Baltic independence protest

Meanwhile those who stayed in Latvia at the late 80ies were on path on making legal Jewish organization as the state reforms finally allowed to create national minority organizations. The Jewish community was divided in two fractions. The “culture” fraction did not insist on leaving, but on maintaining the Jewish culture at home. The “political” fraction meanwhile maintained that in current circumstances the national revival is only possible in Israel. On 1988 the Latvian Jewish Cultural Society was founded in Skolas Street 6th the former Jewish theater later turned in to Communist party congress building. When the new Congress building was made, the Jews regained the old Jewish theater. The main stage was full of people witnessing the grand event the revival of the Latvian Jewish community.

Skolas Street 6th became the center of the modern day Jewish community in Latvia. On 1996 the unified Council of the Latvian Jewish communities and congregations becoming the main representative of the Jews in Latvia. The rather small minority of six thousand people are one of the most active national minorities in Latvia. On 1992 Latvia established diplomatic relations with Israel. The contacts between Latvian and Israeli Jews are dense and helping the local Jewish community. The Holocaust has finally received its place in Latvian history. It has been studied in depth. New monuments have been built across Latvia to commemorate the events. The Jewish nation has survived many attempts of assimilation and extermination. Their successful struggle against soviet assimilation is another proof of how the strong is the Jewish nation.

The Bloody Sunday on the January 22 (9 according to Julian calendar still used in Russian Empire) was a wakeup call for many nations across the Russian Empire. For Russians it was a fight for more political and social rights. For Latvians it was fight also for greater national rights. This was shared also by the Jewish people living across the Russian Empire. Their main strive was to defend themselves from the violent anti-Semitism and abolish all restrictions towards them. Together with Latvian revolutionaries they were united under one common goal – to bring down the oppressive absolute tsar Nicholas II monarchy. The revolution of 1905 was one of the interesting moments in history where despite cultural and ethnic differences the Latvian and Jewish revolutionaries fought together and even averted the anti-Jewish pogrom attempt in Riga.

Russia was stranger to Jews until the first partition of Poland on 1772 . After the final land grab on 1795 Russia gained enormous territories of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. For centuries Poland had large Jewish population. They were in large numbers in present day Ukraine, Belarus, Lithuania and Latvia. The 1897 First All-Russia national census counted 142 315 Jews within modern borders of Latvia 7,4% of the population. To keep Jews from moving to Moscow or Petersburg Russia introduced the Pale of Settlement (Черта́ осе́длости) a territory for permanent Jewish settlement and it was forbidden to live outside it. Originally only the eastern Latvian part of Latgale was within the Pale of Settlement as it was part of the Province of Vitebsk. But, a sizable Jewish population already lived in Courland. Despite many restrictions Jews managed to settle or work in Riga. Northern Latvian part of Vidzeme renamed almost unreachable to Jews with very small population. Jewish youth faced hard conscription rules for 12 years to serve in army, taxes were higher for them.

During the reign of the liberal Tsar Alexander II the Jewish relations with the state eased but after his assassination the relations gotten again to worsen level. Reactionary forces blamed Jews in the murder first pogroms took place. Pogrom – a large scale violence soon became a synonym for major violent attacks directed towards Jews. A violence that led to a political response from the Jewish nation. One part of them joined the Zionist movement that called for unification of the Jewish people under national means. They rejected assimilation and conversion to Christianity as it would not completely erase anti-Semitism. As Jews will always be regarded as strangers no matter how emancipated in the society they are. There were Zionist movements in Latvia, but their part in the revolution of 1905 was insignificant. And it’s another story to be told in future. The main force of the 1905 revolution was the far left social democrats and within them the Jewish Bund.

The Bund represented the masses of the Jewish workers or the so called Proletariat. Although Jews were always stereotyped as wealthy traders, large masses of Jews worked for 14 hours in a day with low wages and lived in poor unsanitary conditions. Plus the nationally based restrictions made then to unite under the Red Banner that promised equal rights for all nations. The Bund was founded in Vilnius on 1897 as the Universal Jewish Labor Union in Poland, Lithuania and Russia. Later it was commonly known as the Bund (alliance).Bund was the first major Jewish party in Russia and also the first social democratic party. As the Russian Social Democratic Workers party (RSDWP) was founded a year later. Bund joined them and took active part in the strikes and demonstrations. The Russian authorities persecuted them and arrested their leaders. Later because of the national differences on 1903 Bund left the RSDWP, but cooperated with them during the revolution. While the Bund rejected the nationalistic Zionist ideas, they agreed in need of having Jewish schools and keeping the national traditions. However, they were strongly against the role of the religion and insisted on secularity.

The industrialized Riga and other parts of the Baltic province was no stranger to the workers movement. Some Jews like Jankel Epstein from Daugavpils were first to direct the movement. Bund was popular among the Jewish students within the Riga Polititechnical Institute some of them were ejected from it. Daugavpils with major Jewish population – most of them workers was the main headquarters for the Bund. They took part in all strikes and protests including the major First May demonstration that took place in many cities of Russia. Because the demonstration in Vilnius caused rough government response by publicly whipping the organizers, that in response caused attack on the general governor, in Riga local Bund members created a armed resistance group. The external Bund bureau however asked to resort from violence.

The Russian defeat in the war with Japan led towards economical downfall. On January 9 (22) 1905 in Petersburg the large peaceful crowd marching towards the Tsars main palace asking him to listen to their petition was fired upon by the Tsars guard causing bloodbath known as the Bloody Sunday. The largest country in the world with modernizing society, but with decadent absolute monarchy went into rage. Nicholas II witnessed the murder of the Alexander II who was killed by anarchists despite abolishing serfdom and intending to write a constitution. Because of this, Nicholas II was slow and reactionary to reforms. But, the people across the Russia had enough of this. So as the Latvian people.

The leading force of the Latvian revolutionaries was the Latvian Social Democratic Workers Party, united with Bund on January 13 it hosted a demonstration march in Riga for the fallen comrades in Petersburg. The large demonstration of 10 000 people lead by LSDWP leader Ansis Bušēvičs marched from Moscow Street to the city center. Despite Buševičs calling to end the demonstration and lower the red flags , large parts of crowds did not listen and moved towards the armed cavalry of Cossacks.Police and Cossacks responded with fire killing more than 70 people. Many tried to cross the frozen river Daugava to escape the shooting and drowned. Among the killed were five Jews and 9 wounded. The fallen were young men 22 year old Eliass Epstein, Michael David Abramovich of the same age, 17 year old Izrail Jaschikov, Chaim Jankel Sperling 18 years old and 22 years old Michail Ucca. Two among them were from the Bund.

Revolution sparked out in Latvia. Bund started major activities. On 1905 and 1907 two general strikes were held in Daugavpils. An odd form of strike was held in Riga on 1905 May and June a strike of the producers and traders of the kosher meat that left the kosher eating Jews of Riga without kosher food for almost a month. It’s not known how significant was the kosher only population that suffered from this as not all Jews applied to the religious rules. On summer of 1905 the rural workers in Kurzeme (Courland) issued a general strike and Tsarist government issued a state of war within the Courland province. On September 16 the Jewish-Latvian students of the Riga Politechnical institute issued protest in support of the striking field workers.

When the protests resorted to arms Jews joined Latvians in armed assault against the Riga Central Prison to free their imprisoned comrades. In the night of September 6 to 7 47 Latvian and five Jewish fighters raided the prison and freed two main revolutionaries J Lācis and J Šļesers. Also the famous LSDWP commando who became an anarchist Jānis Žāklis later known as the Peter the Painter whose mother was a Lutheran Jew. He took part in most of the armed actions against the Tsarist authorities. However, later he became too violent and was rejected by his social democrat comrades.

The use of violence was a great issue for the Latvian revolutionaries. At the end of the 1905 the revolution was close to failure. On December 9 armed uprising begun in Moscow. Some Latvian, Russian and the Bund called for armed uprising in Riga too. They even insisted on storming the Fortress of Daugavgrīva where the main Riga garrison was stationed. The majority of LSDWP was against such bloodshed, however the Bund did not back down and joined the radical Russian social democrats who wanted the uprising. In long frantic talks from December 11 to December 16 the LSDWP convinced the Bund not to start uprising and general strike. On December 18 the interim Baltic general governor general-lieutenant V Sologob arrived in Riga and started the punishment expeditions.

In one cause the Bund and LSDWP was united without question. Do not allow any pogroms in Riga and elsewhere around Latvia. LSDWP as marxist party was against anti-Semitism and called for general human rights regardless of nationality. Even the future Latvian nationalist leader Arveds Bergs called for full cooperation between Latvians and Jews and asked to give them full rights. On the other side the Latvian monarchist Fricis Veinbergs published anti-Semitic slogans supporting the pogroms.

The 1905 revolution again ignited the pogroms in Russian Empire. The last major pogrom took place in Kishinev modern day Moldova. While Tsar openly condemned this, in private he expressed support for anti-Semitism that could unite nation in support for his regime. The major radical supporters of the Tsar Nicholas II were the far right radicals often with ultra-orthodox views. These people were called the “Black Hundred” (Чёрная сотня). The ideals of the Black Hundred were mix of Russian imperialism, chauvinist nationalism, and religious fundamentalism. Together with violent anti-Semitism the Black Hundred was the first early fascists. Sadly this form of Russian far right is gaining prominence again in the modern day Russia.

It was not just Black Hundred that was responsible for waves of pogroms in Ukraine, Russia and Belarus. On October 18-20 in Odessa 400 people were killed. The Tsarist police although condemning the attacks and trying to arrest the perpetrators, often did nothing on purpose as they believed the majority of the revolutionaries were Jews. Tsar and the Church condemned the attacks, but they also thought that they help them to quell the revolution. Such pogroms could take place in Latvia also but were stopped by the joint Latvian and the Jewish efforts.

First violent attacks against the Jews took place in city of Ludza. But, they were small scale attacks on shops and were stopped by locals. Daugavpils was filled with rumors about coming pogroms in April but did not happen. On August the Riga port workers turned violent and wanted to attack the Jews. This time the police and Cossacks stopped them. On October 17 Tsar was forced to issue his manifesto that gave some of his powers away. The reactionaries blamed the Jews and on October 18 a pogrom started in Kyiv. Then in Riga the local Russian workers who supported the Tsar became violent. They mostly lived in the Moscow district where many Jews lived too and were angry that they liked the new freedoms granted by the weakened Tsar. Riots started on October 22-23. However, these riots only were a attempt to start a pogrom.

On October 22 first clashes between the Russians, Jews and Latvians took place on Lielā Kalna Street near the Orthodox Church. The angry Russians were from the Kuznetsov porcelain factory who assaulted both Latvians and Jews. The fight was stopped only by the arrival of the Cossacks. After learning the news both the LSDWP and Bund decided to form the self defense groups to defend both Latvian and Jewish supporters.

On October 23 the workers of the Kuznetsov factory gathered for a patriotic march a small crowd of 100-150 men. Despite having support for the Black Hundred, there was no such working Black Hundred organization within Latvia at that time. The marchers holding the pictures of Tsar and holding icons marched along the streets of the Moscow district. The marchers started to attack everyone who they disagreed with along the way even Russians. Bloodshed erupted between the marchers, Cossacks and the LSDWP and Bund armed units. Among them the future foreign minister Fēliks Ceilēns. Angry mob joined by homeless and scoundrels attacked the Jewish shops reached the Yaroslavl street 44/43 (now Ludza street) where the Jewish Social home was located and was ready to attack it.

Fortunately the Jewish defenders along with Latvian comrades had already taken the defensive positions. Attackers were held back by the fire, and the Cossacks rushed to the scene to stop both of them. The major pogrom attempt was stopped although later in separate incident one Jew named Jankel Poplak was killed. Also Jew Zalman Gurevich was killed before him. 4 Latvian self defenders were killed in the clashes. 2 Latvians were killed by the angry mob. 3 Russians died along. A total of 47 people were killed or hurt. Majority of them were Latvians. Meaning this was not just pogrom attack against Jews but also against Latvians. As the Russian monarchists regarded Latvian revolutionaries as enemies too.

On October 24 the governor of Vidzeme Nicholas Zvegincev banned all patriotic demonstrations with the pictures of the emperor and the Russian anthem. With Tsar still in place this was clearly attempt of preventing pogrom. Similar clashes on the same time took place in Daugavpils resulting the death of the Jewish combatant Aron Feldman.

The major pogrom was avoided in Riga, because there was no major support for it among Latvian population. Also the Riga Tsarist police and the Cossacks were on the active side of the law. And of course the Latvian-Jewish joint defense groups fought off the Russian radicals. This is a rare event when pogrom was prevented in the major city of the Russian Empire. Other cities were not so fortunate.

After the failure of the 1905 revolution both the LSDWP and Bund worked underground. The outbreak of the First World War caused many Latvians and Jews to take refuge in Russia. The Pale of Settlement was broken. The Revolution of 1917 again took Latvian and Jewish leftists on the streets. Some joined the Bolsheviks. Other sided with democratic Republic of Latvia. During the period of 1918-1934 both LSDWP and Bund took part in the Latvian politics and worked together.

Another year is heading for an end. The last post of this year will be review of events that took place in Latvia during 2014. In past I called the 2011 as the year or troubles, the 2012 the year of quarrels, the 2013 the year of struggles. What I choose for this year will be the Year of Peril. It was the peril of the aggression coming from our eastern borders, it was the peril of the new economic backslide and peril of perpetual troubles and struggles that started on 2009. Yet to start reviewing this year we must go back to November 21 2013. First it was the start of the protests in Kyiv, Ukraine that later affected our country and the Maxima supermarket roof collapse that took away 54 people’s lives and lead to the collapse of the long-standing Valdis Dombrovskis government. Both these events that took place on the same time affected the Latvian inter and foreign policy. Around these two events the story of the perilous 2014 year will be told.

Latvia and the Ukrainian Conflict

Last September I had chance to listen to the famous journalist and author Anne Apelbaum. The author of Gulag A History and The Iron Curtain was no rushing to finish the book about the Golodomor the Great Ukrainian famine on 1932-1933. The book was delayed for many years because the publisher considered Ukraine as unimportant topic as nothing ever happens there that would boost the sales. So it seems that suddenly 2014 became actually the year of Ukraine. But, what started in Ukraine was no coincidence nor it was unexpected. The signs of brewing revolution and conflict were visible on summer 2013 when nation was discussing the coming EU Association agreement that the pro-Moscow president Viktor Yanukovych had promised to sign. At same time some publications were suggesting of possible conflict between Russia and Ukraine in case of moving towards west. One publication was called “Russia could blow up the situation in Crimea”.

The initial protests in Ukraine echoed in Latvian media and social circles. First support actions took place on December near the Ukrainian embassy. They were attended by 20-30 people, mostly the members of the Latvian Ukrainian Congress and the members of the National Alliance that expressed the support to the Ukrainian revolution. Yet the National Alliance is pro-EU only for geopolitical reasons and their members like to play hockey with the Belarusian dictator Alexander Lukashenko. Yet, every further Ukrainian support action gathered more people from all kinds of political parties and social circles. For the starting slogans of the Euromaidan were for joining EU, saying no to corruption and adapting the western values of democracy were appealing to Latvia. We had our barricades on 1991 were we stood against communism and destroyed the communist symbols. While Kyiv was celebrating the demolition of the Lenin monument in Kyiv we are wondering what happened to most Lenin monuments that were taken down on 1991. Yet it was not just about monuments and agreement signing it was a fight for independence and sovereignty. What the 2004 Orange revolution failed to achieve the Euromaidan struggled with blood – full freedom from the yoke of Moscow. Something that every Russian neighbor strives for and for Ukrainians it is matter of historical honor the original Kievan Rus against the Grand Duchy of Moscow – the remnant of the Golden Horde.

The Latvian official policy towards the Ukrainian revolution was supportive and it welcomed the new government that formed in the outcome of February 24 events. Yet what followed next – the Russian invasion and annexation of Crimea and further invasion in Eastern Ukraine started the year of Peril. Many call this ongoing situation as the “New Cold War”, originally this therm was coined by British journalist Edward Lucas on 2008. When Russia provoked Georgia in to war and occupied two of its regions. Later both Russian leaders Vladimir Putin and Dmitri Medvedev later admitted that they planned this war to prevent Georgia from joining EU and NATO. Yet back then the Western leaders swallowed this event with shame. Soon the worldwide economic crisis shadowed the events that took place during summer. Yet the warning was given but not heard – Russia is always in for confrontation towards west no matter the costs. For the Cold War thinking was never given up for the Kremlin rulers.

To explain why Russia in confronting the west right now and has did for last 20 years is to tell the metaphor or the bear and octopus. Russia likes to portray herself as angry bear. Yet, the bear mostly sticks to own territory and himself. He only goes outside his territory when he runs out of food. Otherwise he is mostly peaceful if not attacked or disturbed. That is not Russia. Russia is an octopus. Its head and main body is within Moscow but its testicles stretches all around the Eastern Europe and Asia. It tries to hold all its neighboring countries within its grasp. Any attempt of trying to break free is met with hostility and anger. The octopus is also afraid of others trying to cut of his testicles and reach for its head. Without all of its captured assets the Moscow would be powerless and left to decay. And that’s why Russian propaganda is telling tales of encircled fortress, the hunted bear and struggle to prevent aggression. But, from the history we know that all foreign invasions in Russia from the western side started as response to Russian aggressive policy towards the west. Since the octopus is trying to hold all whats around him this the reason why Russia did not respect the sovereign independent policy of Georgia and Ukraine, while open intervention in neighboring country is “brotherly help”, the involvement of the western countries in the Russia’s neighbors is viewed as aggression against Russia itself. Therefore Russia views all its border states as their sphere of interest that no other country can mingle. And it’s not like EU and NATO really wants the Ukraine, Belarus and Georgia for their sphere of interest. Ukraine needs west more than west needs Ukraine. And the reason is the claws coming from Moscow.

Vladimir Putin may have prevented Georgia from fully joining NATO and made the same harder for Ukraine. However, his most crucial failure was to prevent the Baltic States from joining the Western block. The Baltic States joined NATO and EU on 2004 leaving Russia frustrated and trying to bring their claws back ever since. The Russian aggression in Ukraine suddenly raised the question of the Latvian security. The Latvian political games had managed to remove the influential minister of defense Artis Pabriks from the main political scene. The often hawkish politician for years called for boosting up the neglected Latvian defense budget. It never reached the NATO 2% of the state budget standard. After collapse of the Valdis Dombrovskis Pabriks was called as one of the potential candidates for the Prime Minister. However, the President of Latvia Andris Bērziņš rejected him. Later he was elected as member of EU parliament. The current minister of defense Raimonds Vējonis is a leader of the Green Party. A seemingly unusual choice for such post yet nothing is its seems in the Latvian politics. Vējonis has taken his job seriously and taken steps to boost our military budget. He has brought more NATO troops in Latvia, even tanks from US. However, the army itself needs capable army. The lack of armed vehicles is compensated by buying used ones from UK. The army needs new anti air radars to intercept low flying Russian KA-50 attack helicopters that were stationed near the Latvian borders. Even more crucial is the training of the new servicemen, the support for the National Guard and so on. As Latvia just cannot relay on Estonia that has barely reached 2% defense budget requirement and slightly more equipped Lithuanian army. Furthest neighbor Poland is boosting up military while Sweden is just waking from confusion of the Russian submarine within its waters. Russia is constantly testing the Baltic security by doing almost daily air force flights near the Latvian air space. With their transponders off they force the NATO Baltic patrol planes to take off to intercept them. Recently even the old but majestic TU-95 strategic bombers took flights within the Baltic Sea. Recently Russia has brought Iskander missiles to its Kaliningrad enclave for “drills”. All this has made opposite effect – NATO is bringing even more resources to ensure the Baltic security.

The Latvian inner security is also under question. The underfunded police force and seemingly slow and invisible special services raised doubts. The Security Police had change in leadership – the ongoing general Jānis Reiniks was replaced by Normunds Mežveits. Trough out the year there were various attempts by locals to support terrorists in Eastern Ukraine. From raising donations to sending actual recruits. While Estonian security service had exposed many Russian agents, the Security Service and Constitutional Defense Bureau had found none. The other important question was the Residence Permits in exchange for real state property program for Russian citizens. By buying real estate in Latvia the Russian, Chinese or other non-EU citizen could gain residence permit within EU countries. The National Alliance had campaigned to close it down for years, sparking concerns of danger to the state security. The defenders of this policy says its helps the crisis hurt real estate to survive and that some of the residents from Russia are opponents of the Putin’s policy. True that small portion of Russian dissidents has left Russia for Latvia, for it’s a country with high use of Russian language and that the former Lenta.ru banned by Putin is now working in Riga as Meduza.ru. But its only a small number. One part of the Russian investors only buy the real estate but is not living there, renting or selling to others and giving no other investments to Latvian economy. Russia a country with official anti-western policy but with tons of investments and property within EU and US is a danger to Latvian economic and inner security. So far this residence permit security has not fully abolished.

Latvia joined the EU and US joint sanctions against Russia. The Russian response – to ban the import of EU food products, meat, fish and dairy products affected some of the Latvian companies. Not only that the Lithuanian and Polish apple importers were forced to send their production to Latvia alarming the local apple sellers. But, the local apple harvest was poor this year anyway. While most Latvian traders accepted this and tried to compensate the losses others openly protested therefore boosting the Russian propaganda. One of the most prominent complainers was Major of Riga Nils Ušakovs. Leader of the mainly Russian speaking voters party left unreasonable rants about the sanctions in twitter and said that he is going to Moscow to “beg” to allow at least some of the Latvian products. His main concern was his special Rishij Dvorik Latvian food stand that grew empty after sanctions. Despite his visit to Moscow were he met Dmitri Medvedev and Grand Patriarch of the Moscow Orthodox Church Kirill his Rizhkij Dvorik remained empty and went to rock bottom after Russian currency crisis.

Ušakovs also sent apologies to the blacklisted Russian singers and actors who expressed support for the Russian aggression. Among them Josif Kobzon, Valeria and others. In the end International Music festival “New Wave” hosted by the Russian television decided to leave Jurmala resort and move somewhere else presumably Crimea. The Ušakovs rants about sanctions and blacklists raised another issue- the issue of the pro-Moscow parties within Latvia. The Harmony Center now known simply as socialdemocratic party “Harmony” found itself unconformable with the Ukrainian issue. While confirming they support the Ukrainian territorial integrity, they were reluctant to denounce the Russian invasion and broke the association agreement with the United Russia party – the leading party in Russia. While Harmony balanced as usual the other one the Latvian Russian Union openly supported the Crimean annexation. Their leader Tatjana Ždanoka – the communist orthodox from the 1989-1991 came to Crimean “referendum” as EU observer. Despite the condemnations Ždanoka was re-elected as member of EU parliament openly pushing the Kremlin interests within Brussels. Her party however failed to reach any success in the parliament elections. The other more radical forces the movement “Zarya” (The Awakening) run by far right Ilarions Girss and Jevgēņijs Osipovs were preaching that Latvia should become another Donbass. Throughout the year various Russian ideologues entered Latvia as part of the organization Media club “A-3” and expressed the ideas of Russian world and Euroasian state. Also the newly elected member of the parliament Ingūna Sudraba raised doubts about her connections with the Russian secret service and Kremlin elite. More bizarre was here connections with bogus religious group “Urantia” that believes in reptilian conspiracy against Russia and Putin as the holy savior. The invisible yet so visible reach of the Moscow octopus takes many passages to be described but this is a short glimpse.

The Collapsed Roof of the Latvian politics

The Maxima disaster left great shock to the Latvian society. The radicals wanted heads to roll immediately. However, the Latvian old saying of responsibility – Everyone is responsible, therefore no one is responsible again worked. The president Andris Bērziņš who called disaster as major mass murder had to approve his rhetoric. After harsh talk with prime minister Valdis Dombrovskis, the latter resigned. Dombrovskis who had been Prime minister of several governments since 2008, lead the country trough the crisis and pawed Latvia to Eurozone had to resign ending an era. A question yet remains who stands behind his resignation that seemed unintended, – the president, parliamentary speaker Solvita Āboltiņa or the oligarch Aivars Lenmbergs or all of them together will not be answered now. It will take time to answer what happened on late November 2013. Right now Dombrovskis serves as European Commissioner for the Euro and Social Dialogue.

What was left after Dombrovskis was political vacuum before 2014 October general election. As mentioned Artis Pabriks was turned down by the president or he was let down by his own party. The leader of the Unity party Solvita Aboltiņa refused to take PM office. The grey cardinal was growing unpopular within the voters so placed forward a compromise figure – the non party minister of Agriculture Laimdota Straujuma. A discrete careful woman the Straujuma became the first female PM in Latvia. As the anti-lemberg Reform Party went into decay, the Lembergs lead Green Party Union returned to coalition and took over many important sectors such as Defense. Straujuma firstly considered herself only as temporarily Prime Minister until elections in October.

However, the power gap in Unity party was clearly visible. Two most prominent leaders Dombrovskis and Pabriks were elected to Brussels. The other members were not strong and influential to lead the country. So Straujuma remained as PM candidate for the elections and now serves her second therm. The elections became nightmare for the party leadership. The party chairman also the chairman of the parliament (Saeima) Solvita Āboltiņa was not elected. The ongoing red-haired speaker has grown infamous for here arrogance and schemes. However, let’s be honest – the Latvian society dislikes strong powerful woman in office. But, Āboltiņa did not surrender. Jānis Junkurs the member of the Reform Party separatists, rather quiet and mysterious young man, now turned to Unity to run in elections. With his self funded election campaign he gained more points than the Grey Cardinal with Red hair and made in to parliament above here. But he was absent from the public scene after the election. Then on the day when the new parliament was called he announced his resignation from the parliament. In such matter according to election laws the Solvita Āboltiņa replaced him. Leaving no comment the Junkurs left the scene and founded new company in Hong Kong. Many obviously pointed that he was forced to give his seat to Āboltiņa. She soon took the seat of the National Security Parliamentary Commission showing that foxes never give up.

The National Alliance gained extra seats in the elections. Known as champions in conservative ideology they were known as champions in justice corruption. Of course nothing is proven. Only that both of their ministers for Justice and Regional Affairs were rejected to receive state secrets. So were taken out of game. Still Nationals secured the control over justice after the elections, and also gained the most valuable parliamentary speaker seat that was taken by Ināra Mūrniece.

The Green Farmers – alliance between Latvian Farmers Union and the Green Party and the Ventspils city party of Aivars Lembergs benefited the most from the Dombrovskis downfall. Their main opponents the Reform Party had went into collapse. The Green Farmers returned to coalition and secured their old sectors – agriculture and welfare and also conquered the strategically vital ministry of defense and ministry of economy. The later was taken by chess champion Daiga Reiznience-Ozola.

The Harmony party failed this year. Despite winning the election by percent, they did not gain enough seats to form coalition. Nor they were asked to because of the Ukrainian conflict. Their potential allies – For Latvia With Heart only gained 7 seats. More interesting was the new Regional Party elected member Artuss Kaimiņš. Outspoken, aggressive, often rude actor, he owned videoblog that was aired on radio for some time, where he interviewed his guest in the most bombastic way now entered politics. His main flagship was the Maxima disaster investigation on parliamentary level and exposure of the corruption and injustice. After few months he was denounced for his drunk fight in rock cafe. Its remains to be seen if he will evolve into Latvian Alexander Zhirinovsky.

Latvia so far rather successfully survived the national currency Lats transition to Euro. The patriotic nostalgia of the old beutiful currency soon was washed away by the war in Ukraine, as it was more important to be part of the strong global currency. The Russian propaganda tales of the Eurozone collapse now is dwindled away by the real collapse of the Russian ruble. Now our neighbor Lithuania will enter Eurozone on 2015 making Baltic states under single currency.

Latvia – challenges for the 2015

Latvia will become the presiding nation of the EU. The EU presidency during these turbulent times will be crucial. In both of state security and international prestige. Russia openly harassed Lithuania during its presidency this year. Informational war and military threats are potential danger. Latvia has been exposed to the Russian propaganda for years and it will grow even more. Great concern is if Russia is planning more than informational warfare but a hybrid warfare using gaps in our security. Such actions can be dangerous for both Russia and Latvia as we are the NATO member. Another danger is looming in our neighboring country Belarus. For 20 years this country has been ruled by authoritarian president Alexander Lukashenko whose semi-socialist economy is depended on Russia. As the ruble in Russia went into decay the over inflated Belarusian ruble took a hit. Lukashenko is looking to avoid maidan in Belarus, by balancing between Moscow and Europe and his people. Same as Yanukovych the Lukashenko maneuvers will end at one point leaving country in danger of either revolution or the Russian incursion. Since Belarus is our neighboring country that also should be considered as the fourth Baltic State, any major disturbance especially if its involves EU and Russia will be the prime interest for Latvia, Lithuania and Poland. Certainly the Belarus could be potential hotspot and game changer on 2015.

The economical development is at constant caution. Latvia seemingly recovered from the economic crisis on the end 2013. We entered Euro, the remnant of the 2013 crisis the Citadele bank – the former Parex Bank that state had to nationalize was sold to foreign investors this November. The economical and energy dependence on hostile Russia must be limit if not cut all together. Russian economy is collapsing because of the western sanctions and the falling oil prices. Greater economical ties and cooperation must be established with Ukraine and Belarus. Russian economic sanctions are likely to increase on Latvia during 2015. On 2015 Latvia will be on the front of the international rivalry between the West and the Moscow octopus. The 2015 will be the year of the Goat. Goat is symbol of smartness, independence and wealth. Yet Goat is also the symbol of the Devils face. The Goat year previously was 1919 and 1991 the two very crucial years for Latvia. Lets be smart and independent and also courageous on year 2015 and reach new milestone and achievements.